Whenever I write a detailed climate change/global warming story, I expect the comments section to be filled with criticism and attacks of varying degrees. Typically, they are led by those who feel the Star is covering climate change theories because the paper has an agenda to promote the Democratic party, nurture environmentalism, promote government overreach, shut down Western civilization. Still others like to say that the paper is a sucker for charlatan scientists who are lusting after grant funds. 

On Sunday, I wasn't disappointed, for sure. The 105 comments on the Star Sunday story, titled, "Our weird weather may be linked to rapid melting of Arctic sea ice," ran the gamut.

One remarked, "But think of how much shipping will be improved when the Northwest Passage is rendered ice free. I'm going to invest in shipping concerns after reading this."

Another said, "I enjoyed the story because I am a weather nerd.

"But it is disturbing that ADS and like publications continually pound the liberal drum beat for Obama, while ignoring the very real cover-ups by his administration.

"By the way, lots of things may cause lots of things."

To be sure, a number of writers offered rebuttals, although the ratio of nonbelievers to believers in climate change science was the usual 2 or 3 to 1.

The big surprise came this morning, when the following email landed in my inbox (I'm working today) from a reader who felt the story didn't go far enough in the other direction. She was upset because the story failed in her eyes to connect the crazy weather and the sea ice loss with human causes. I'm putting in her name because she, unlike the anonymous sorts who frequent the comments page, was willing top provide it.

"Thank you for your article about the melting ice caps. You missed an opportunity and failed until well into your 1400 plus words to mention that we humans bear any responsibility for creating this problem. Then you have a vague quote from an expert who merely states that "the extreme weather that has occurred is unfolding in a context of human induced changes", whatever that means.

"The scientists and the reporters who write about global warming  need to admit to the public that, as Pogo would have said, "The enemy is us". Yes, global warming is our fault, and it is now our responsibility, to try to correct the problems if we even still have the time. I hope your next article will point out our part and mention ways we can start making the necessary changes.

Arlene Sikkink, retired nurse, Tucson